Nowadays, some employers think that formal academic qualifications are more important than life experience or personal quanlities when they look for new employees?
Why is in this case? Is it positive or negative?
It is true that jobseekers often pay more attention to choose candidates who have the degree of profesional knowledge than ones with personality traits and life skills. While this trend is ascribed to some factors, I would contend that this policy is totally disadvantageous.
There are two compelling reasons as to why some recruiters favour academic knowledge over work experience or individual qualtities during recruitement processes. From the perspective of economic, employers may save a considerable amount of money on training academic-related knowledge for new staffs. These recruters, as a consequence, may have more capital to invest in other key sectors such as replacing current equipments by ones applied the cutting-edge technology to insrease in work efficient. Furthermore, many jobseekers believe that candidates having a high level of academic achievement can have higher job productivity than those without any qualifications. This is because if people hold a degree, they often have profound knowledge of their field.
However, I am firmly convinced that the thought of recruiters about the less importance of life experience and personal qualities than formal academic knowledge is negaive. In terms of businesses, this trend may be the main culprit of devastating their comprehensive development. A clear explanation is that employers may overlook the applications of potential employees whose professional qualities are not reflected by a degree. Regarding candidates, despite the scarcity of academic knowledge, they can have other essential working skills such as leadership, communication or teamwork. They, as a result, do not have equal access to job opportunities.
To sum up, the priority of formal academic qualifications over life experience and personal characteristics in the recruitment processes derives from some factors, including saving money for training new staffs. In addition, I would argue that this activity is associated with some drawbacks such as producing a negative impact on the holistic development of companies or unfair among appliants seeking their jobs.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-11-22 | truognchinh | 84 | view |
- Nowadays, as women and men have to work full-time, household duties should be equally divided. Do you agree or disagree? 73
- The bar chart below shows shares of expenditures for five major categories in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Japan in the year 2009. 67
- Nowadays, some employers think that formal academic qualifications are more important than life experience or personal quanlities when they look for new employees?Why is in this case? Is it positive or negative? 84
- Some students prefer to take a gap year and between high school university to work or to travel. Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages? 73
- cities owadays people use bicycle less as a form of transport. Why is that? What can we do to encourage people to use bicycle more? 61
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 96, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...uiters about the less importance of life experience and personal qualities than f...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, however, if, look, may, regarding, so, while, as to, in addition, such as, as a result, it is true, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1801.0 1615.20841683 112% => OK
No of words: 315.0 315.596192385 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.71746031746 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.31860085202 2.80592935109 118% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 176.041082164 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.606349206349 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 570.6 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.1673657547 49.4020404114 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.642857143 106.682146367 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5 20.7667163134 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.71428571429 7.06120827912 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.281864858977 0.244688304435 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0864159530747 0.084324248473 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0586844303765 0.0667982634062 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.168540581217 0.151304729494 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0305407726276 0.056905535591 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 13.0946893788 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 50.2224549098 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.19 12.4159519038 130% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.74 8.58950901804 113% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 78.4519038076 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.